Dinosaurs are not real :(

Vonhelmet · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:34

bhavv said:
Its an incorrect definition.

You'd best run along and edit Wikipedia. And the OED. And quite a few philosophy texts.

RDM · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:34

bhavv said:
Both those lines completely contradictory to one another.

Only if you are arrogant enough to believe you now everything.

Vonhelmet · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:35

bhavv said:
If you believe in the possibility of something existing, then you cannot claim that it absolutely doesnt exist.

RDM isn't doing that. He is saying he does not believe in God, which is a weak atheism type statement. He's also saying that God may exist, but he doesn't know either way.

Deadbeat · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:36

Castiel said:
The Powder puff girls are real, by the definition of what the powder puff girls are, and that is an animated tv series created by Craig McCracken they are real and can this can be proven scientifically by simply producing the creator, the film and the animation itself.

If the definition is that the Powder Puff Girls are living breathing people then again this can be disproved scientifically in the same way, by producing the animation, the creator and film to illustrate the reality of the proposition.

Unfortunately God is not falsifiable and unlike the powder puff girls doesn't have a unified universal definition, so to make any scientific judgement of the existence or non existence of God is futile.

Science is entirely agnostic on the subject.

Also, Powerpuff Girls. Don't bring your sacrilege into this!

bhavv · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:37

http://stephenlaw.blogspot.com/2007/02/atheism-faith-position.html

Is atheism a "faith" position? If by "faith position" we mean can't be proved beyond all doubt, then yes, it is. But then so is the belief that there are no fairies and that the sun goes round the Earth. It doesn't follow from the fact that both
theism and atheism are "faith positions" in this sense that they are equally reasonable.

If by "faith position" we mean can't be proved beyond reasonable doubt, then I certainly don't accept that atheism is a "faith position". The evidence for atheism is overwhelming (though of course not everyone can see the evidence is overwhelming - this sort of evidence-blindness is an interesting feature of religious belief. That religion certainly does have the power to blind people to the obvious is demonstrated by the fact that in just 50 years, some 100 million US citizens have come to accept both that the entire universe is six thousand years old and that this is consistent with the empirical evidence).

RDM · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:38

bhavv said:
If you believe in the possibility of something existing, then you cannot claim that it absolutely doesnt exist.

Where did I claim it absolutely doesn't exist?

Vonhelmet · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:38

bhavv said:
http://stephenlaw.blogspot.com/2007/02/atheism-faith-position.html

He's ignoring the difference between strong and weak atheism. You are a strong atheist who refuses to accept that there are such logically tenable positions as weak atheism or agnosticism. This is your failing, and not that of anyone else.

bhavv · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:40

Vonhelmet said:
He's ignoring the difference between strong and weak atheism. You are a strong atheist who refuses to accept that there are such logically tenable positions as weak atheism or agnosticism. This is your failing, and not that of anyone else.

Im not denying Agnosticism. I stated that I believe it to be a state of confusion in which a person cannot make up their mind.

I definitely am however denying your claims of weak and strong Atheism.

jellybeard999 · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:40

http://www.arcadebomb.com/play/robot_dinosaurs_that_shoot_beams_when_they_roar.html

Castiel · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:40

Deadbeat said:
Also, Powerpuff Girls. Don't bring your sacrilege into this!

It does feel a bit like that. I went to all the trouble of answering Bhavvs question the way he wanted (and incessantly demanded) and he didn't even acknowledge my effort....

And yes...Power Puff Girls.....I do apologise.

Apparently Science is now a state of confusion where no-one can make up their mind...... :eek:

dirtychinchilla · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:41

taintedlove69 said:
Can't believe this thread is on its 16th page

the debate rages across the world

RDM · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:42

Vonhelmet said:
RDM isn't doing that. He is saying he does not believe in God, which is a weak atheism type statement. He's also saying that God may exist, but he doesn't know either way.

Pretty much, though to be pedantic I would put both those gods wholly in lower case. God with an upper case G tends to denote the Abrahamic god.

Vonhelmet · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:42

bhavv said:
Im not denying Agnosticism. I stated that I believe it to be a state of confusion in which a person cannot make up their mind.

It's the most scientifically acceptable position to conclude on, given that the existence of God is not scientifically testable :confused:

bhavv said:
I definitely am however denying your claims of weak and strong Atheism.

Then you're out of touch with the philosophy of belief. Strong atheism is an assertion. Weak atheism is closer to the confused state that you've described above.

Vonhelmet · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:42

RDM said:
Pretty much, though to be pedantic I would put both those gods wholly in lower case. God with an upper case G tends to denote the Abrahamic god.

Fair point.

bhavv · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:43

Castiel said:
It does feel a bit like that. I went to all the trouble of answering Bhavvs question the way he wanted (and incessantly demanded) and he didn't even acknowledge my effort....

What???

You didnt even answer the question I wanted you to, the one you answered was a hypothetical question that Im not bothered about in the slightest, and your reply to that was nothing but a lolfest.

Vonhelmet said:
It's the most scientifically acceptable position to conclude on, given that the existence of God is not scientifically testable

I dont believe that any state of belief - Theism, Agnosticism, or Atheism is 'Scientifically acceptable'. Most scientists, science teachers, and science students are actually Atheists, this is a fact.

Vonhelmet · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:47

bhavv said:
I dont believe that any state of belief - Theism, Agnosticism, or Atheism is 'Scientifically acceptable'. Most scientists and science students are actually Atheists, this is a fact.

The principle of agnosticism - in the general sense, not in relation to God - underpins all science.

Moreover, the scientific method requires belief in the first place - belief in the idea that evidence of past events can allow you to predictively model future ones.

RDM · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:48

bhavv said:
I dont believe that any state of belief - Theism, Agnosticism, or Atheism is 'Scientifically acceptable'. Most scientists, science teachers, and science students are actually Atheists, this is a fact.

Do you have any proof of that statement or do we have to take it on faith?

bhavv · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:49

RDM said:
Do you have any proof of that statement or do we have to take it on faith?

Student surveys, and my past classmates and teachers.

Feel free to look it up or carry out your own research if you have to, I think you will find it to be true.

Here you go:

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html

Castiel · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:50

bhavv said:
What???

You didnt even answer the question I wanted you to, the one you answered was a hypothetical question that Im not bothered about in the slightest, and your reply to that was nothing but a lolfest.

Castiel said:
However in the interest of conciliation I will try again giving my solely own opinion.

Simply put.....Most Christian denominations (those with a non-literal interpretation of Scripture) hold that there is a God that created the Material Universe and by association all life within (including Mankind), and that Evolution is a natural process within that overall divine creation and as such Evolution is a mechanism employed by God to develop life on Earth, including that of Man.

This view is accepted by Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, the major Protestant denominations, Judaism and the independent Free Churches that do not ascribe to a literal view of specific Scripture, namely Genesis....as I pointed out earlier there is another group of Christians that ascribe to an interpretation known as Biblical Literalism and they generally hold a literal view of scripture including Genesis and they oppose Evolution, preferring Creationism or Intelligent Design. The latter is a minority viewpoint not held by the mainstream Christian or Jewish Faiths.

I hope this answers your question Bhavv.

That is not a lolfest as you put it, it is the accepted belief of mainstream Judeo-Christian religion and while it may not fit into your agenda, it is in fact correct and answers the question you put to me as you requested.

That you do not like the answer or that is contradicts your opinion is your problem not mine or anyone elses.

bhavv · 15 Dec 2011 at 18:52

I was referring to your 'powder puff girls' post quite obviously.

And even that quote is lolworthy because hardly any Christians think that way.

But still, it isnt your opinion, its what you think other people believe. You still refuse to answer the question with your own personal beliefs because you know you cant.